Free Sticker Lady

It’s been already on the news; a young lady with a passion for local arts had been apprehended by the local police for vandalism. Some of her ‘works’ include spraying with stencils on the road, and pasting of sticker on public infrastructure. The typography on the stickers are actually not vulgar at all, and by all means, a refreshing sight (to me).

The young lady in question (a Samantha Lo) had been charged with vandalism and had been sentenced to 3 years jail. The big question is not the hefty jail term (by which a doctor received a 4 weeks sentence for drink-driving, and killing someone) compared to other serious (and horrendous) crime. But what constitutes to vandalism.  

Vandalism Act in Singapore

The vandalism act was actually introduced on 17 August 1966. And on the second reading, the then Minister of State for defend explained the need for the bill as “The writing of slogans, drawing of pictures, painting and marking or inscribing on public and private property has been rampant”. Now in Singapore, the government introduce law to help protect public infrastructure (like banning of chewing gums to protect MRTs).

The minister continued his speech, which blurs between democracy, arts and self-expression by saying, “used by anti-social and anti-national elements in the name of democracy, but their crude artistic feats in effect destroy and deface what democracy has built for the people.”

What actually is interesting of this Act is the efficiency of imposing it to parliament. According to Wikipedia, it was read for the third time and passed the very same day. There wasn’t any objection or whatsoever. When passed, the Act becomes:

(a) without the written authority of an authorised officer or representative of the Government or of the government of any Commonwealth or foreign country or of any statutory body or authority or of any armed force lawfully present in Singapore in the case of public property, or without the written consent of the owner or occupier in the case of private property —

(i) writing, drawing, painting, marking or inscribing on any public property or private property any word, slogan, caricature, drawing, mark, symbol or other thing;

(ii) affixing, posting up or displaying on any public property or private property any poster, placard, advertisement, bill, notice, paper or other document or

(iii) hanging, suspending, hoisting, affixing or displaying on or from any public property or private property any flag, bunting, standard, banner or the like with any word, slogan, caricature, drawing, mark, symbol or other thing; or

(b) stealing, destroying or damaging any public property.

Free Sticker Lady?

In fairness, the inscribing on the road with the word “My Grandfather Road” does falls under part (i), which is a drawing on public property without any written authority or any means. This makes it Vandalism, so as to speak. The law is just.

What are worrying might be the perception people had about graffiti, freedom of speech, self-expression and art. Definitely, I think, the judge imposes the highest sentence possible to deter others from committing the same offense. But will this actually deter others from committing the same offenses? With the recent MRT vandal, where the Swiss is sentence to a few strokes of the cane, will the public ever learn there is a proper place and avenue? Well, perhaps there aren’t any proper avenue.

For her sticker pasting antics, it is more of a humorous side. Initially, many of us thought it’s some marketing stunt/campaign. Wordings are not vulgar, and instead are light-hearted.

What actually infuriates most people is the police is actually not apprehending other forms of un-sightful vandalism- advertisement pasted everywhere on lamppost, traffic light poles.

When will the public learn, that they are not above the law, and the law is indeed, above us all.